list http://www.spout.com/ Recent community activity around The Passion of The Christ on Spout Copyright 2005-9 Spout, LLC Spout RSS http://www.spout.com/images/SpoutLogoRSS.jpg http://www.spout.com/ 136 30 http://www.spout.com/films/The_Passion_of_The_Christ/230789/default.aspx Title: The Passion of The Christ
Year: 2004
Director: Mel Gibson
Plot: Mel Gibson's well-publicized production The Passion of the Christ concerns the last 12 hours in the life of Jesus of Nazareth. The dialogue is spoken in the ancient Aramaic language, along with Latin and Hebrew. In the Garden of Gethsemane near the Mount of Olives, Jesus (James Caviezel) is betrayed by Judas Iscariot (Luca Lionello). Jesus is condemned to death for blasphemy and brought before Pontius Pilate (Hristo Naumov Shopov), the Roman governor of Judea, for sentencing. The roaring crowd demand his death, so Pilate orders his crucifixion. Jesus is severely beaten and made to carry his cross up to Golgotha, the hill outside Jerusalem, where he is nailed to the cross. Romanian theatrical actress Maia Morgenstern plays Mary, Mother of God, and Italian superstar Monica Bellucci plays Mary Magdalene. Amid much controversy involving Gibson and various religious organizations, The Passion of the Christ received an international theatrical release in February of 2004. In March 2005, Gibson released an unrated version of the film, dubbed The Passion Recut, that eliminated five to six minutes of the more graphic scenes of flogging and crucifixion. ~ Andrea LeVasseur, All Movie Guide
Times Tagged: 118
Number of Lists: 59
Number of blog posts: 9
Number of discussion threads: 3
SpoutRating: 3
]]>Mon, 11 May 2009 20:00:53 GMTThe Passion of The Christ2004Mel Gibson<a href="/players/P____91479/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Mel Gibson</a>'s well-publicized production The Passion of the Christ concerns the last 12 hours in the life of Jesus of Nazareth. The dialogue is spoken in the ancient Aramaic language, along with Latin and Hebrew. In the Garden of Gethsemane near the Mount of Olives, Jesus (<a href="/players/P____11903/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>James Caviezel</a>) is betrayed by Judas Iscariot (Luca Lionello). Jesus is condemned to death for blasphemy and brought before Pontius Pilate (Hristo Naumov Shopov), the Roman governor of Judea, for sentencing. The roaring crowd demand his death, so Pilate orders his crucifixion. Jesus is severely beaten and made to carry his cross up to Golgotha, the hill outside Jerusalem, where he is nailed to the cross. Romanian theatrical actress Maia Morgenstern plays Mary, Mother of God, and Italian superstar <a href="/players/P___195176/default.aspx" style='text-decoration:underline'>Monica Bellucci</a> plays Mary Magdalene. Amid much controversy involving Gibson and various religious organizations, The Passion of the Christ received an international theatrical release in February of 2004. In March 2005, Gibson released an unrated version of the film, dubbed The Passion Recut, that eliminated five to six minutes of the more graphic scenes of flogging and crucifixion. ~ Andrea LeVasseur, All Movie Guide118Tag Target (>10)59933http://www.spout.com/ProductImages/t91083p7os1.jpghttp://www.spout.com/films/The_Passion_of_The_Christ/230789/default.aspxFilm http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/11/13/37289.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 11/13/2008 5:00:46 PM
Body: Danny Boyle’s new crowd-pleasing film Slumdog Millionaire was originally intended to be shot entirely in English, but apparently due to the preferences of a casting director, about a third of the movie is in Hindi. While this fraction may not be enough to call it a foreign-language film, it could have been enough to turn off subtitle-fearing audiences were the movie not so otherwise accessible due to its feel-good, “Hollywood-style” story involving star-crossed romance, destiny and an ultimate “love conquers all” message. Also, the movie breaks free from one off-putting foreign film tradition by following Man on Fire, Night Watch and TV’s Heroes into the realm of non-traditional subtitling. Slumdog received a standing ovation at the Toronto Film Festival, where it won the People’s Choice Award, and it could very well extend its popularity in the direction of the multiplex crowd. If it’s a hit with moviegoers who aren’t typically open to world cinema, this could be the chance for similarly feel-good foreign films to cross over and reach a wider audience, whether they be upcoming releases like the Sundance-winning Captain Abu Raed or titles from the past that could always use more Netflix-queue love. And so, in the hopes that Slumdog could help open the door to further foreign film consumption, SpoutBlog presents this guide to the most accessible world cinema titles from the past ten years. For every entry-level film on the list, we name a couple of more intermediate titled in the same vein — just in case you get hooked. Amelie Spout.com user leeroy711 recently referred to this imaginative French film as the foreign-language cinema’s “gateway drug.” And it’s certainly true that its fanciful romantic story and colorful tone have won the favor of many a young adult not previously accustomed to European cinema. Never mind that it makes stalking seem a little too precious and innocent — the film’s whimsical title character (played delightfully by Audrey Tautou), full of good intentions and lots of heart, will have you wishing you had such a thoughtful and inventive pursuer. Also worth checking out: A Very Long Engagement; Love Me If You Dare The Chorus Hollywood sometimes seems to have cornered the market on movies about inspirational teachers, especially those involving music instruction. But this French film proves that foreign films can have similarly motivational stories about great educators and their newly encouraged students. Also worth checking out: Small Voices; Monsieur Ibrahim City of God This Brazilian film set in the favelas of Rio can be quite violent, enough to have been compared to gangster films like Goodfellas (though Goodfellas doesn’t have any little kids being shot in the foot). But at its center is the uplifting tale of a boy who makes it out of the slums in order to become a successful writer. Also worth checking out: City of Men (both the TV series and the feature film) Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon Martial arts cinema has long been an accessible genre to a large enough portion of Americans, but this film, which became the top grossing foreign-language title in the U.S. (not counting The Passion of the Christ), has managed to acquire fans that don’t normally go for kung fu and wuxia. The main attraction that makes this title more appealing than most is likely its production value, which with its beautiful cinematography and well-crafted special effects allows it to compare to romantic epics out of Hollywood. Also worth checking out: Hero; House of Flying Daggers Lagaan: Once Upon a Time in India The running time of 3 hrs. 43 min. probably seems like a deterrent, but this Bollywood film really does feel a lot shorter than it is. Really. And anyway its compelling story of an underdog cricket team is familiar enough that you don’t have to pay too much attention if you don’t have the time — though it will be difficult to let your attention stray except for during some of the less-adequately translated musical numbers that aren’t so significant or relatable to most Western viewers. Just think of this film as your typical Hollywood sports movie, except instead of the final game being quickly highlighted in the last 30 minutes, it’s seemingly depicted in its entirety for more than an hour. And yes, the ending is a crowd-pleaser. Also worth checking out: The Cup; Monsoon Wedding Life is Beautiful This Oscar-winning film is so feel-good that it comes close to overkill. In fact, a decade after its release, it’s easy to forget just how entertaining it is. Just as we’re more likely to remember the stomach ache after gorging ourselves with delicious sweets or the hangover that follows a great night of drinking, moviegoers often recall only the obnoxiousness that came with an overexposed and over-awarded Roberto Benigni. But don’t let the cynics keep you from enjoying such a heartwarming and inspiriting tale of a “real life Prince Charming.” Also worth checking out: I Served the King of England The Motorcycle Diaries Hollywood could actually take a cue from this film the next time it wants to make one of those prequels detailing the life of an iconic villain (ex: Hannibal Rising), at least if it wants audiences to like the guy enough to forget he grows up to be a murderous rebel. Whether or not you like who and what Ernesto Guevara becomes in the years after The Motorcycle Diaries takes place, you’ll have no trouble falling for his younger self as he ditches his privileged life and devotes himself to a colony of lepers. Also worth checking out: Downfall Pan’s Labyrinth In the tradition of such dark yet magical stories as Alice in Wonderland and The Wizard of Oz, a little girl encounters strange creatures and kind of winds up a princess. It’s ultimately a very sad and depressing film, but the ending at least pretends to be happy, enough that you might think your eyes are watering with tears of joy. Also worth checking out: City of Lost Children Run Lola Run It’s extremely fast-paced, a little bit MTV, a little bit video game, and it features a character you really want to root for, especially because she’s narratively allotted a few do-overs in order to make things right. And mainstream moviegoers love stories of both chance and second chances. Roger Ebert also noted in his review that it’s the kind of film that could play in a sports bar, so perhaps it’s even more of a gateway foreign film for sports fans than Lagaan. Also worth checking out: The Princess and the Warrior; Amores perros Tsotsi Like City of God, this film involves a crime-ridden ghetto, but it’s even more accessible than that film despite its lack of inspiring upward mobility. It could probably appeal most to fans of American “urban” gangster films, but any mainstream moviegoer should enjoy the conventional plot involving a thug who accidentally kidnaps a baby and then changes morally as a result. Also worth checking out: Kolya; Central Station Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Thu, 13 Nov 2008 22:00:46 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com11/13/2008 5:00:46 PMDanny Boyle’s new crowd-pleasing film Slumdog Millionaire was originally intended to be shot entirely in English, but apparently due to the preferences of a casting director, about a third of the movie is in Hindi. While this fraction may not be enough to call it a foreign-language film, it could have been enough to turn off subtitle-fearing audiences were the movie not so otherwise accessible due to its feel-good, “Hollywood-style” story involving star-crossed romance, destiny and an ultimate “love conquers all” message. Also, the movie breaks free from one off-putting foreign film tradition by following Man on Fire, Night Watch and TV’s Heroes into the realm of non-traditional subtitling. Slumdog received a standing ovation at the Toronto Film Festival, where it won the People’s Choice Award, and it could very well extend its popularity in the direction of the multiplex crowd. If it’s a hit with moviegoers who aren’t typically open to world cinema, this could be the chance for similarly feel-good foreign films to cross over and reach a wider audience, whether they be upcoming releases like the Sundance-winning Captain Abu Raed or titles from the past that could always use more Netflix-queue love. And so, in the hopes that Slumdog could help open the door to further foreign film consumption, SpoutBlog presents this guide to the most accessible world cinema titles from the past ten years. For every entry-level film on the list, we name a couple of more intermediate titled in the same vein — just in case you get hooked. Amelie Spout.com user leeroy711 recently referred to this imaginative French film as the foreign-language cinema’s “gateway drug.” And it’s certainly true that its fanciful romantic story and colorful tone have won the favor of many a young adult not previously accustomed to European cinema. Never mind that it makes stalking seem a little too precious and innocent — the film’s whimsical title character (played delightfully by Audrey Tautou), full of good intentions and lots of heart, will have you wishing you had such a thoughtful and inventive pursuer. Also worth checking out: A Very Long Engagement; Love Me If You Dare The Chorus Hollywood sometimes seems to have cornered the market on movies about inspirational teachers, especially those involving music instruction. But this French film proves that foreign films can have similarly motivational stories about great educators and their newly encouraged students. Also worth checking out: Small Voices; Monsieur Ibrahim City of God This Brazilian film set in the favelas of Rio can be quite violent, enough to have been compared to gangster films like Goodfellas (though Goodfellas doesn’t have any little kids being shot in the foot). But at its center is the uplifting tale of a boy who makes it out of the slums in order to become a successful writer. Also worth checking out: City of Men (both the TV series and the feature film) Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon Martial arts cinema has long been an accessible genre to a large enough portion of Americans, but this film, which became the top grossing foreign-language title in the U.S. (not counting The Passion of the Christ), has managed to acquire fans that don’t normally go for kung fu and wuxia. The main attraction that makes this title more appealing than most is likely its production value, which with its beautiful cinematography and well-crafted special effects allows it to compare to romantic epics out of Hollywood. Also worth checking out: Hero; House of Flying Daggers Lagaan: Once Upon a Time in India The running time of 3 hrs. 43 min. probably seems like a deterrent, but this Bollywood film really does feel a lot shorter than it is. Really. And anyway its compelling story of an underdog cricket team is familiar enough that you don’t have to pay too much attention if you don’t have the time — though it will be difficult to let your attention stray except for during some of the less-adequately translated musical numbers that aren’t so significant or relatable to most Western viewers. Just think of this film as your typical Hollywood sports movie, except instead of the final game being quickly highlighted in the last 30 minutes, it’s seemingly depicted in its entirety for more than an hour. And yes, the ending is a crowd-pleaser. Also worth checking out: The Cup; Monsoon Wedding Life is Beautiful This Oscar-winning film is so feel-good that it comes close to overkill. In fact, a decade after its release, it’s easy to forget just how entertaining it is. Just as we’re more likely to remember the stomach ache after gorging ourselves with delicious sweets or the hangover that follows a great night of drinking, moviegoers often recall only the obnoxiousness that came with an overexposed and over-awarded Roberto Benigni. But don’t let the cynics keep you from enjoying such a heartwarming and inspiriting tale of a “real life Prince Charming.” Also worth checking out: I Served the King of England The Motorcycle Diaries Hollywood could actually take a cue from this film the next time it wants to make one of those prequels detailing the life of an iconic villain (ex: Hannibal Rising), at least if it wants audiences to like the guy enough to forget he grows up to be a murderous rebel. Whether or not you like who and what Ernesto Guevara becomes in the years after The Motorcycle Diaries takes place, you’ll have no trouble falling for his younger self as he ditches his privileged life and devotes himself to a colony of lepers. Also worth checking out: Downfall Pan’s Labyrinth In the tradition of such dark yet magical stories as Alice in Wonderland and The Wizard of Oz, a little girl encounters strange creatures and kind of winds up a princess. It’s ultimately a very sad and depressing film, but the ending at least pretends to be happy, enough that you might think your eyes are watering with tears of joy. Also worth checking out: City of Lost Children Run Lola Run It’s extremely fast-paced, a little bit MTV, a little bit video game, and it features a character you really want to root for, especially because she’s narratively allotted a few do-overs in order to make things right. And mainstream moviegoers love stories of both chance and second chances. Roger Ebert also noted in his review that it’s the kind of film that could play in a sports bar, so perhaps it’s even more of a gateway foreign film for sports fans than Lagaan. Also worth checking out: The Princess and the Warrior; Amores perros Tsotsi Like City of God, this film involves a crime-ridden ghetto, but it’s even more accessible than that film despite its lack of inspiring upward mobility. It could probably appeal most to fans of American “urban” gangster films, but any mainstream moviegoer should enjoy the conventional plot involving a thug who accidentally kidnaps a baby and then changes morally as a result. Also worth checking out: Kolya; Central Station Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/groups/Weekly_Theme/Re_Weekly_Theme_for_October_6_Revenge/625/36408/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: SkyPilot
Post To: Weekly Theme
Post Date: 10/16/2008 3:52:08 PM
Body: Afro-Samurai is based on revenge. Is revenge frequently a theme of anime?
]]>Thu, 16 Oct 2008 19:52:08 GMTSkyPilotWeekly Theme10/16/2008 3:52:08 PMAfro-Samurai is based on revenge. Is revenge frequently a theme of anime? http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/10/14/36308.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 10/14/2008 5:01:12 PM
Body: Oliver Stone has long been synonymous with political passion projects, but his latest film, W., may be his most ambitious effort yet, if only because of how quickly the thing came together and got made. Now the serio-comic biopic about our sitting president is about to hit theaters, less than ten months after anyone had heard of its inception, and it’s getting a number of favorable reviews, will possibly rule the box office this weekend, and could even garner an Oscar nomination for Josh Brolin, who portrays the man with the titular initial, George W. Bush. But not all political passion projects are quite as successful as W. is expected to be. Some such films have been banned, while some have simply failed to acquire an audience on more democratic grounds, whether in terms of box office, critical or awards recognition. Yet regardless of the reception of a political passion project, either at the time of release (or intended release) or decades later, it may be regarded as an achievement merely for being made, because it can be a difficult task for a filmmaker, no matter how famous or powerful, to completely, without compromise, express his or her politics using such a collaborative and populist form of art as cinema. We’ve put together a list of 10 political passion projects that were (and are) successful on both levels. They’ve been embraced by a wide audience, a majority of critics and/or the Academy, and they also manage to be as uncompromising in their political passion as is possible in Hollywood. The Great Dictator (Charles Chaplin, 1940) For his first “talkie”, Chaplin took on Hitler and the Nazis when it was still taboo for American media to do so. And it became his biggest hit ever in spite of its controversial subject matter. Considering one of the major problems with W. is reportedly Oliver Stone’s inability to mix the serious scenes with the comic, he might have benefitted from looking again at this film, one of the greatest political satires of all time. Meet John Doe (Frank Capra, 1941) Capra had already made a number of greater films with political subject matter, but this was pretty much his ultimate passion project, a culmination of themes he’d worked with on similar films like Mr. Deeds Goes to Town and Mr. Smith Goes to Washington. But as successful as those films were in terms of Capra’s political expression, and as free as the filmmaker seemed to be throughout his illustrious career at Columbia Pictures, he always felt at least a little stifled by studio head Harry Cohn, and so with this, his first semi-independent project (co-produced and distributed by Warner Bros.), he had the most creative control yet. Unfortunately, the result wasn’t nearly as popular as his past films and the film is also not nearly as tight a work. However, more than 65 years later, it’s still one of the best displays of a filmmaker attempting to work out and express his political ideals in a mainstream film. Wilson (Henry King, 1944) Long before Oliver Stone and political documentarians made it more common and acceptable to make a movie about disliked politicians, producer and 20th Century Fox founder Darryl F. Zanuck developed this passion project about his favorite president, Woodrow Wilson. And the result would seem to have been a great success based on its reception by critics and the Academy Awards (nominated for 10, it won 5 Oscars, including Best Original Screenplay), yet it was a terrible, terrible flop at the box office, apparently because the public didn’t like or care about Wilson as much as Zanuck did. And legend has it that Zanuck was so embarrassed by the failure that he forbade his staff to ever mention its title again. Despite it’s Oscar success, it is unfortunately unavailable on DVD. The Green Berets (Ray Kellogg, John Wayne, John Gaddis and Mervyn LeRoy, 1968) Regardless of whether or not you agree with John Wayne’s politics, you have to give the guy some respect for making a stand with this film, which displays his support for the Vietnam War. It was a bold move for anybody, even one of Hollywood’s biggest stars, to dare go up against the zeitgeist of the times. And of course it was and is very much hated because of its heavy handed pro-war message. Reds (Warren Beatty, 1981) Beatty had already shown himself to be something of a politically minded celebrity, and he would go on to a greater reputation for being a liberal actor/filmmaker, but here with his first solo directing effort, he made an ambitious epic about the American communist John Reed and released it in a year that ushered in the most conservatively materialistic decade of the 20th century. Despite the political climate of the country, though, it was relatively successful at the box office, and it went on to recieve 12 Oscar nominations, of which it won 3, including a Best Director trophy for Beatty. Malcolm X (Spike Lee, 1992) Whether or not you believe it should have been nominated for more Oscars or if it was politically and racially ignored, the success of Malcolm X, both financially and culturally, was a terrific achievement for Spike Lee, who had made and has made less ambitious political passion projects before and since, some even arguably better than this one. Dead Man Walking (Tim Robbins, 1995) Robbins had already begun making political statement films a few years earlier with Bob Roberts, but this film, which he also produced, is the greater passion project. It may occasionally put off supporters of the death penalty, but those performances by Sean Penn and Susan Sarandon (who won an Oscar) simply can not be ignored. The Passion of the Christ (Mel Gibson, 2004) You can’t think about passion projects without this film immediately coming to mind –– and not just because it has the word passion right there in the title. As for the political part, as much as some of us would prefer not to think of religion as being a part of politics, it certainly is, and both the marketing and reception of Gibson’s film were very much from political perspectives, possibly even more so than from straight religious perspectives. Good Night, and Good Luck (George Clooney, 2005) Perhaps the best cinematic celebration of journalism since All the President’s Men, Clooney’s film is also possibly the classiest political passion project since guys like Beatty, Robbins and Clooney decided to go behind the camera and express their ideals. Darfur Now (Ted Braun, 2007) At a time when famous people like George Clooney and the double duty of “Brangelina” get equal respect and flak for being so political, it’s refreshing to see this documentary defend celebrity action while also examining the film’s specific cause. Produced by and featuring Don Cheadle (and also featuring Clooney), the doc is not technically the actor’s project as much as it is Braun’s, yet due to Cheadle’s passionate interest in the Darfur issue and his involvement with and in the film, and because he’s the biggest name on the production, it can certainly be accepted as equally his political effort. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Tue, 14 Oct 2008 21:01:12 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com10/14/2008 5:01:12 PMOliver Stone has long been synonymous with political passion projects, but his latest film, W., may be his most ambitious effort yet, if only because of how quickly the thing came together and got made. Now the serio-comic biopic about our sitting president is about to hit theaters, less than ten months after anyone had heard of its inception, and it’s getting a number of favorable reviews, will possibly rule the box office this weekend, and could even garner an Oscar nomination for Josh Brolin, who portrays the man with the titular initial, George W. Bush. But not all political passion projects are quite as successful as W. is expected to be. Some such films have been banned, while some have simply failed to acquire an audience on more democratic grounds, whether in terms of box office, critical or awards recognition. Yet regardless of the reception of a political passion project, either at the time of release (or intended release) or decades later, it may be regarded as an achievement merely for being made, because it can be a difficult task for a filmmaker, no matter how famous or powerful, to completely, without compromise, express his or her politics using such a collaborative and populist form of art as cinema. We’ve put together a list of 10 political passion projects that were (and are) successful on both levels. They’ve been embraced by a wide audience, a majority of critics and/or the Academy, and they also manage to be as uncompromising in their political passion as is possible in Hollywood. The Great Dictator (Charles Chaplin, 1940) For his first “talkie”, Chaplin took on Hitler and the Nazis when it was still taboo for American media to do so. And it became his biggest hit ever in spite of its controversial subject matter. Considering one of the major problems with W. is reportedly Oliver Stone’s inability to mix the serious scenes with the comic, he might have benefitted from looking again at this film, one of the greatest political satires of all time. Meet John Doe (Frank Capra, 1941) Capra had already made a number of greater films with political subject matter, but this was pretty much his ultimate passion project, a culmination of themes he’d worked with on similar films like Mr. Deeds Goes to Town and Mr. Smith Goes to Washington. But as successful as those films were in terms of Capra’s political expression, and as free as the filmmaker seemed to be throughout his illustrious career at Columbia Pictures, he always felt at least a little stifled by studio head Harry Cohn, and so with this, his first semi-independent project (co-produced and distributed by Warner Bros.), he had the most creative control yet. Unfortunately, the result wasn’t nearly as popular as his past films and the film is also not nearly as tight a work. However, more than 65 years later, it’s still one of the best displays of a filmmaker attempting to work out and express his political ideals in a mainstream film. Wilson (Henry King, 1944) Long before Oliver Stone and political documentarians made it more common and acceptable to make a movie about disliked politicians, producer and 20th Century Fox founder Darryl F. Zanuck developed this passion project about his favorite president, Woodrow Wilson. And the result would seem to have been a great success based on its reception by critics and the Academy Awards (nominated for 10, it won 5 Oscars, including Best Original Screenplay), yet it was a terrible, terrible flop at the box office, apparently because the public didn’t like or care about Wilson as much as Zanuck did. And legend has it that Zanuck was so embarrassed by the failure that he forbade his staff to ever mention its title again. Despite it’s Oscar success, it is unfortunately unavailable on DVD. The Green Berets (Ray Kellogg, John Wayne, John Gaddis and Mervyn LeRoy, 1968) Regardless of whether or not you agree with John Wayne’s politics, you have to give the guy some respect for making a stand with this film, which displays his support for the Vietnam War. It was a bold move for anybody, even one of Hollywood’s biggest stars, to dare go up against the zeitgeist of the times. And of course it was and is very much hated because of its heavy handed pro-war message. Reds (Warren Beatty, 1981) Beatty had already shown himself to be something of a politically minded celebrity, and he would go on to a greater reputation for being a liberal actor/filmmaker, but here with his first solo directing effort, he made an ambitious epic about the American communist John Reed and released it in a year that ushered in the most conservatively materialistic decade of the 20th century. Despite the political climate of the country, though, it was relatively successful at the box office, and it went on to recieve 12 Oscar nominations, of which it won 3, including a Best Director trophy for Beatty. Malcolm X (Spike Lee, 1992) Whether or not you believe it should have been nominated for more Oscars or if it was politically and racially ignored, the success of Malcolm X, both financially and culturally, was a terrific achievement for Spike Lee, who had made and has made less ambitious political passion projects before and since, some even arguably better than this one. Dead Man Walking (Tim Robbins, 1995) Robbins had already begun making political statement films a few years earlier with Bob Roberts, but this film, which he also produced, is the greater passion project. It may occasionally put off supporters of the death penalty, but those performances by Sean Penn and Susan Sarandon (who won an Oscar) simply can not be ignored. The Passion of the Christ (Mel Gibson, 2004) You can’t think about passion projects without this film immediately coming to mind –– and not just because it has the word passion right there in the title. As for the political part, as much as some of us would prefer not to think of religion as being a part of politics, it certainly is, and both the marketing and reception of Gibson’s film were very much from political perspectives, possibly even more so than from straight religious perspectives. Good Night, and Good Luck (George Clooney, 2005) Perhaps the best cinematic celebration of journalism since All the President’s Men, Clooney’s film is also possibly the classiest political passion project since guys like Beatty, Robbins and Clooney decided to go behind the camera and express their ideals. Darfur Now (Ted Braun, 2007) At a time when famous people like George Clooney and the double duty of “Brangelina” get equal respect and flak for being so political, it’s refreshing to see this documentary defend celebrity action while also examining the film’s specific cause. Produced by and featuring Don Cheadle (and also featuring Clooney), the doc is not technically the actor’s project as much as it is Braun’s, yet due to Cheadle’s passionate interest in the Darfur issue and his involvement with and in the film, and because he’s the biggest name on the production, it can certainly be accepted as equally his political effort. Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/groups/Filmgaming/Re_Cast_BATMAN_3/563/33806/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: jonnygotham
Post To: Filmgaming
Post Date: 8/9/2008 8:05:19 PM
Body: Hello Everyone: I realize this has been said before, as I'm joining a bit late in the game, but I agree that the next solid and fitting character for the Batman movies would draw from the story arc of HUSH, by Jeph Loeb. Nolan has a knack for cutting and piecing together story elements, which is going to come in handy when the need arises to cut out a great deal of characters from this story line - which is practically Batman versus his entire Rogues Gallery. Further, it's something that would need to be done. Some characters would simply be too fantastic to fit the grit of the world that Nolan took so long to create, and for the sake of creating a strong and enjoyable film, you need to focus on the concentrating things rather than diluting the story with too many characters. That being said, the main villain is HUSH. Thomas Elliot. As it has already been described, Thomas Elliot is an excellent character foil for the Batman/Bruce Wayne character. While having several parallels to both sides of the Batman/Bruce Wayne character, Elliot also has a small, but powerful set of ties and links to the Dark Knight character that make for a great story. The end of "The Dark Knight" saw the hero finally turn into a villain. Presumably, opinion is now going to be split on the Batman character, with far more of its citizens fearing the hero than begging for his help. This takes the main character away from the previous story push and aim to create a symbol that inspires people, allowing a story shift and pursuance of another avenue that is equally compelling. The hero is locked-in now. No one to pick up the mantle, its just him to save the people... and they don't necessarily want his help. As a now isolated character without aid or allies, it is conceivable that Batman pushes beyond his limits and actually suffers the injuries that introduce the Hush character to the story (Elliot, childhood friend, is a world-renounce surgeon - the best in his field and the only one they can trust to handle the operation and potential questions about the nature of the injuries). There is a very engrossing story that is possible there, between a hero that's been cutoff and the renewing of an old friend. The equalities of the Elliot character to Bruce Wayne in intelligence, success, and discipline provide interactions that were as interesting, if not more, as the love triangle dinner we saw in "The Dark Knight". The fact that he knows the hero's secrets and is smart enough to exploit the weaknesses Batman has in the wake of the last movie make the story less Superhero flick, and more revenge thriller (as the last film capitalized on making a crime drama, rather than the standard superhero movie). The costumes are solid and realistic. For much of the story, the Hush character appears as a face-bandaged, trench-coat figure and shadow. This helps, because with the unknown status of the Two Face character, we have an identity mystery - is the villain Harvey Dent? - Now completely mad and face-fully bandaged similar to the hospital scenes in the Dark Knight, or is it someone completely new? Further, with the relative unknown nature of the Hush villain until very recently, this ambiguity helps, because everyone is going to wonder who the next big costume villain is going to be - and they aren't going to get it. There are a myriad of supporting characters to aid this new story and complementary direction, and I leave their inclusion and exclusion to Nolan. There is something to be said about the possibilities of this new villain though. We gain a friend that the isolated hero needs. We gain a character interaction that is similar to the friendship between Harvey Dent and Bruce Wayne that was left out of "The Dark Knight", and only slightly exploited in the Love Triangle dinner scene. We have an equal, if not smarter adversary, with a distinct advantage over the hero in that he knows the full playing field and all the players, where Batman does not because of the events at the end of the last movie. Finally, we have a good story that isn't filled with Super-ness. It's a pure revenge-angled crime story. Plenty of options with psychosis, flash-backs, inner struggles, finding control within doing good and dealing with anger and violence, etc. So with the case presented, comes the problem of casting. The character has to match in charisma, acting talent, and needs to be able to switch between friend and foe without the cliches of cinema. He can be the villain without a sinister laugh, vocal change, or costume - the worst villains don't have to LOOK like villains, they're the friends that are trusted and wreak havoc by exploiting their unique positions. Hugh Jackman would be great because of stature and talent - not Wolverine, but more The Fountain and Prestige. Problem is resurrecting the Bale/Jackman duo without reminding the audience of their previous collaboration, similar in revenge aspect. Further, I'm not sure what happens with contracts and acting in multiple superhero franchises. Tom Cruise is great, except for stature. While a lot of people have issues with him, he matches in charisma, looks, and seriousness that would be needed. Unfortunately, he doesn't command the same weight in presence due to his size, especially relative to Bale. He would do well though, given the psyche exploits in Vanilla Sky and other work. I do not like Gerard Butler, as previously noted. I feel like it would become too reminiscent of his previous villain and hero roles and fall victim to the cliches stated before. I had to wrack my brain, and I'm still on the fence a bit (because there might be someone more fitting), but among the many options in Hollywood, perhaps James Caviezel would suit the role well. He has strength in previous roles: Thin Red Line, Count of Monte Cristo, Passion of the Christ, etc. He has similar stature to Bale, if only slightly taller than Bale (according to IMDB), and he evokes a feeling of sympathy for his characters, no matter the act - which helps when crafting a villain. You don't just need Batman to trust him, you need the audience to trust him. There is enough in the HUSH story to bring old characters and villains back to help minimize "noise" in the story, while it also has enough options to introduce new characters to help with transitions and plot development. Hopefully, you'll all see some merits in this, and maybe find a more suitable player to fill the shoes, but either way, the villain of Hush presents a pretty strong case to fill out and end Nolan's work with the Batman franchise. Three films is enough for the current ensemble - enough to be great, and still has potential to leave its fans wanting more. Thanks for the patience in reading. Best. jonny.gotham
]]>Sun, 10 Aug 2008 00:05:19 GMTjonnygothamFilmgaming8/9/2008 8:05:19 PM Hello Everyone: I realize this has been said before, as I'm joining a bit late in the game, but I agree that the next solid and fitting character for the Batman movies would draw from the story arc of HUSH, by Jeph Loeb. Nolan has a knack for cutting and piecing together story elements, which is going to come in handy when the need arises to cut out a great deal of characters from this story line - which is practically Batman versus his entire Rogues Gallery. Further, it's something that would need to be done. Some characters would simply be too fantastic to fit the grit of the world that Nolan took so long to create, and for the sake of creating a strong and enjoyable film, you need to focus on the concentrating things rather than diluting the story with too many characters. That being said, the main villain is HUSH. Thomas Elliot. As it has already been described, Thomas Elliot is an excellent character foil for the Batman/Bruce Wayne character. While having several parallels to both sides of the Batman/Bruce Wayne character, Elliot also has a small, but powerful set of ties and links to the Dark Knight character that make for a great story. The end of "The Dark Knight" saw the hero finally turn into a villain. Presumably, opinion is now going to be split on the Batman character, with far more of its citizens fearing the hero than begging for his help. This takes the main character away from the previous story push and aim to create a symbol that inspires people, allowing a story shift and pursuance of another avenue that is equally compelling. The hero is locked-in now. No one to pick up the mantle, its just him to save the people... and they don't necessarily want his help. As a now isolated character without aid or allies, it is conceivable that Batman pushes beyond his limits and actually suffers the injuries that introduce the Hush character to the story (Elliot, childhood friend, is a world-renounce surgeon - the best in his field and the only one they can trust to handle the operation and potential questions about the nature of the injuries). There is a very engrossing story that is possible there, between a hero that's been cutoff and the renewing of an old friend. The equalities of the Elliot character to Bruce Wayne in intelligence, success, and discipline provide interactions that were as interesting, if not more, as the love triangle dinner we saw in "The Dark Knight". The fact that he knows the hero's secrets and is smart enough to exploit the weaknesses Batman has in the wake of the last movie make the story less Superhero flick, and more revenge thriller (as the last film capitalized on making a crime drama, rather than the standard superhero movie). The costumes are solid and realistic. For much of the story, the Hush character appears as a face-bandaged, trench-coat figure and shadow. This helps, because with the unknown status of the Two Face character, we have an identity mystery - is the villain Harvey Dent? - Now completely mad and face-fully bandaged similar to the hospital scenes in the Dark Knight, or is it someone completely new? Further, with the relative unknown nature of the Hush villain until very recently, this ambiguity helps, because everyone is going to wonder who the next big costume villain is going to be - and they aren't going to get it. There are a myriad of supporting characters to aid this new story and complementary direction, and I leave their inclusion and exclusion to Nolan. There is something to be said about the possibilities of this new villain though. We gain a friend that the isolated hero needs. We gain a character interaction that is similar to the friendship between Harvey Dent and Bruce Wayne that was left out of "The Dark Knight", and only slightly exploited in the Love Triangle dinner scene. We have an equal, if not smarter adversary, with a distinct advantage over the hero in that he knows the full playing field and all the players, where Batman does not because of the events at the end of the last movie. Finally, we have a good story that isn't filled with Super-ness. It's a pure revenge-angled crime story. Plenty of options with psychosis, flash-backs, inner struggles, finding control within doing good and dealing with anger and violence, etc. So with the case presented, comes the problem of casting. The character has to match in charisma, acting talent, and needs to be able to switch between friend and foe without the cliches of cinema. He can be the villain without a sinister laugh, vocal change, or costume - the worst villains don't have to LOOK like villains, they're the friends that are trusted and wreak havoc by exploiting their unique positions. Hugh Jackman would be great because of stature and talent - not Wolverine, but more The Fountain and Prestige. Problem is resurrecting the Bale/Jackman duo without reminding the audience of their previous collaboration, similar in revenge aspect. Further, I'm not sure what happens with contracts and acting in multiple superhero franchises. Tom Cruise is great, except for stature. While a lot of people have issues with him, he matches in charisma, looks, and seriousness that would be needed. Unfortunately, he doesn't command the same weight in presence due to his size, especially relative to Bale. He would do well though, given the psyche exploits in Vanilla Sky and other work. I do not like Gerard Butler, as previously noted. I feel like it would become too reminiscent of his previous villain and hero roles and fall victim to the cliches stated before. I had to wrack my brain, and I'm still on the fence a bit (because there might be someone more fitting), but among the many options in Hollywood, perhaps James Caviezel would suit the role well. He has strength in previous roles: Thin Red Line, Count of Monte Cristo, Passion of the Christ, etc. He has similar stature to Bale, if only slightly taller than Bale (according to IMDB), and he evokes a feeling of sympathy for his characters, no matter the act - which helps when crafting a villain. You don't just need Batman to trust him, you need the audience to trust him. There is enough in the HUSH story to bring old characters and villains back to help minimize "noise" in the story, while it also has enough options to introduce new characters to help with transitions and plot development. Hopefully, you'll all see some merits in this, and maybe find a more suitable player to fill the shoes, but either way, the villain of Hush presents a pretty strong case to fill out and end Nolan's work with the Batman franchise. Three films is enough for the current ensemble - enough to be great, and still has potential to leave its fans wanting more. Thanks for the patience in reading. Best. jonny.gotham http://www.spout.com/blogs/skypilot/archive/2008/6/27/31797.aspx Post By: SkyPilot
Post To: SkyPilot Blog
Post Date: 6/27/2008 2:29:37 PM
Body: One of the most enjoyable movies I've seen recently is a bizarre but cookin' action movie called Doomsday. It's Neil Marshall's (Dog Soldiers, The Descent) latest horror/sci-fi movie. Doomsday is like Escape From New York meets The Stand. It's post-apocalyptic filmmaking at its most enjoyable. And I've got to talk about how regarding violence, this movie has its cake and eats it too. This is a graphic film; for short burts it's as graphic as Passion of the Christ or the new Rambo, which both disturbed me quite a bit. What's strange is that while I found the intense violence in Passion or Rambo to be much more sickening than entertaining, the violence of Doomsday really appealed to me as entertainment. What is even stranger is that one of the themes of Doomsday is the futile and selfish nature of cruelty... so it somehow manages to be really fun-violent while trying to unmask actual fun-violence as an abomination! And it's got killer car chases and fight scenes, too. WTF? This is surely a strange kind of great movie! Anyone know of a big-studio production that's as complex and fun as this? My contention is that the studios largely don't know how to pull this kind of thing off. I recommend this to all sci-fi and horror fans, anyone interested in violence in films, and anybody who likes wild rides. You'll be shaken and stirred by this movie, and you'll be smiling woozily when the ride gets over. PS--For those interested in the setup: when a deadly virus breaks out in Scotland, the UK quarantines the entire nation. A giant wall is constructed, and the virus is successfully contained. The world tries to forget about how they left Scotland to rot.Twenty years on, it looks like the same virus has suddenly appeared in downtown London. An elite military team is briefed that there is evidence of survivors in Glasgow, Scotland. The team has twenty-four hours to find these survivors--if in fact they really exist--and find out how they survived the epidemic. The viewer's joy ensues.
]]>Fri, 27 Jun 2008 18:29:37 GMTSkyPilotSkyPilot Blog6/27/2008 2:29:37 PMOne of the most enjoyable movies I've seen recently is a bizarre but cookin' action movie called Doomsday. It's Neil Marshall's (Dog Soldiers, The Descent) latest horror/sci-fi movie. Doomsday is like Escape From New York meets The Stand. It's post-apocalyptic filmmaking at its most enjoyable. And I've got to talk about how regarding violence, this movie has its cake and eats it too. This is a graphic film; for short burts it's as graphic as Passion of the Christ or the new Rambo, which both disturbed me quite a bit. What's strange is that while I found the intense violence in Passion or Rambo to be much more sickening than entertaining, the violence of Doomsday really appealed to me as entertainment. What is even stranger is that one of the themes of Doomsday is the futile and selfish nature of cruelty... so it somehow manages to be really fun-violent while trying to unmask actual fun-violence as an abomination! And it's got killer car chases and fight scenes, too. WTF? This is surely a strange kind of great movie! Anyone know of a big-studio production that's as complex and fun as this? My contention is that the studios largely don't know how to pull this kind of thing off. I recommend this to all sci-fi and horror fans, anyone interested in violence in films, and anybody who likes wild rides. You'll be shaken and stirred by this movie, and you'll be smiling woozily when the ride gets over. PS--For those interested in the setup: when a deadly virus breaks out in Scotland, the UK quarantines the entire nation. A giant wall is constructed, and the virus is successfully contained. The world tries to forget about how they left Scotland to rot.Twenty years on, it looks like the same virus has suddenly appeared in downtown London. An elite military team is briefed that there is evidence of survivors in Glasgow, Scotland. The team has twenty-four hours to find these survivors--if in fact they really exist--and find out how they survived the epidemic. The viewer's joy ensues. http://www.spout.com/groups/B_Movies/B_is_the_new_B_Modern_B_Movies/588/31796/1/ShowPost.aspx Post By: SkyPilot
Post To: B Movies
Post Date: 6/27/2008 2:28:20 PM
Body: One of the most enjoyable movies I've seen recently is a bizarre but cookin' action movie called Doomsday. It's Neil Marshall's (Dog Soldiers, The Descent) latest horror/sci-fi movie. Doomsday is like Escape From New York meets The Stand. It's post-apocalyptic filmmaking at its most enjoyable. And I've got to talk about how regarding violence, this movie has its cake and eats it too. This is a graphic film; for short burts it's as graphic as Passion of the Christ or the new Rambo, which both disturbed me quite a bit. What's strange is that while I found the intense violence in Passion or Rambo to be much more sickening than entertaining, the violence of Doomsday really appealed to me as entertainment. What is even stranger is that one of the themes of Doomsday is the futile and selfish nature of cruelty... so it somehow manages to be really fun-violent while trying to unmask actual fun-violence as an abomination! And it's got killer car chases and fight scenes, too. WTF? This is surely a strange kind of great movie! Anyone know of a big-studio production that's as complex and fun as this? My contention is that the studios largely don't know how to pull this kind of thing off. I recommend this to all sci-fi and horror fans, anyone interested in violence in films, and anybody who likes wild rides. You'll be shaken and stirred by this movie, and you'll be smiling woozily when the ride gets over. PS--For those interested in the setup: when a deadly virus breaks out in Scotland, the UK quarantines the entire nation. A giant wall is constructed, and the virus is successfully contained. The world tries to forget about how they left Scotland to rot.Twenty years on, it looks like the same virus has suddenly appeared in downtown London. An elite military team is briefed that there is evidence of survivors in Glasgow, Scotland. The team has twenty-four hours to find these survivors--if in fact they really exist--and find out how they survived the epidemic. The viewer's joy ensues.
]]>Fri, 27 Jun 2008 18:28:20 GMTSkyPilotB Movies6/27/2008 2:28:20 PMOne of the most enjoyable movies I've seen recently is a bizarre but cookin' action movie called Doomsday. It's Neil Marshall's (Dog Soldiers, The Descent) latest horror/sci-fi movie. Doomsday is like Escape From New York meets The Stand. It's post-apocalyptic filmmaking at its most enjoyable. And I've got to talk about how regarding violence, this movie has its cake and eats it too. This is a graphic film; for short burts it's as graphic as Passion of the Christ or the new Rambo, which both disturbed me quite a bit. What's strange is that while I found the intense violence in Passion or Rambo to be much more sickening than entertaining, the violence of Doomsday really appealed to me as entertainment. What is even stranger is that one of the themes of Doomsday is the futile and selfish nature of cruelty... so it somehow manages to be really fun-violent while trying to unmask actual fun-violence as an abomination! And it's got killer car chases and fight scenes, too. WTF? This is surely a strange kind of great movie! Anyone know of a big-studio production that's as complex and fun as this? My contention is that the studios largely don't know how to pull this kind of thing off. I recommend this to all sci-fi and horror fans, anyone interested in violence in films, and anybody who likes wild rides. You'll be shaken and stirred by this movie, and you'll be smiling woozily when the ride gets over. PS--For those interested in the setup: when a deadly virus breaks out in Scotland, the UK quarantines the entire nation. A giant wall is constructed, and the virus is successfully contained. The world tries to forget about how they left Scotland to rot.Twenty years on, it looks like the same virus has suddenly appeared in downtown London. An elite military team is briefed that there is evidence of survivors in Glasgow, Scotland. The team has twenty-four hours to find these survivors--if in fact they really exist--and find out how they survived the epidemic. The viewer's joy ensues. http://www.spout.com/blogs/spoutblog/archive/2008/6/19/31428.aspx Post By: SpoutBlog
Post To: SpoutBlog on spout.com
Post Date: 6/19/2008 3:00:57 PM
Body: This week we have two big-time offenders: Mike Myers’ The Love Guru, which has brought concern from Hindus, because the comedy seems to be making fun of the Hindu religion; and Ron Howard’s Angels & Demons, the “sequel” to The Da Vinci Code, adapted from Dan Brown’s bestseller. Earlier this week, the Vatican banned the latter production from all Catholic churches in Rome. The following statement from Father Marco Fibbi, spokesman for the diocese of Rome, was a favorite quote from the story: “Usually we read the script but in this case it wasn’t necessary. Just the name Dan Brown was enough.” Of course, these days, religious organizations taking offense to a movie seems so commonplace that news like this is hardly even considered bad buzz. Neither The Love Guru nor Angels & Demons will be too aversely affected by the protests or boycotts. Both films will merely be added to the following list of major offenders (in alphabetical order so as not to offend anyone who thinks one is more offensive than another), as almost a genre cataloging than an inventory of condemned. Brokeback Mountain - Because of its promotion of “the homosexual lifestyle,” many right-wing Christian groups protested Ang Lee’s film. Most famously, it was pulled last-minute from a multiplex owned by Mormon businessman and Utah Jazz owner Larry H. Miller, though his motivation was not necessarily claimed to be religion-based. Despite there being hundreds of gay films throughout the years, because of its popularity, this one was the worst offender. The Da Vinci Code - I already mentioned this above and in a recent post on movies that overcame bad buzz, so I’ll make it short: banned, boycotted and protested throughout the world due to its blasphemous (and fictional) allegations that Jesus and Mary Magdalene had a child together. The Devils - Many of the following films were banned in Italy, but with Ken Russell’s blasphemous adaptation of Aldous Huxley’s “The Devils of Loudon,” there was also threat that stars Oliver Reed and Vanessa Redgrave would be arrested if they entered the country. The most offensive scene, labeled “the rape of Christ,” depicted a mock exorcism involving fully nude nuns masturbating with a large crucifix. The scene was removed prior to the film’s release, but there were plenty of other controversial sequences that led to protest. A very low-quality DVD of the film was released a few years ago with the “rape of Christ” scene put back in. Dogma - I understand how comedy can be seen as offensive, especially in the case of stereotypical caricatures like the one in The Love Guru. But Kevin Smith’s religious satire is so silly and all over the place that I can’t imagine that viewers would take its contents seriously. Yet enough protests required the film to be disowned by Miramax/Disney and then eventually be released (courtesy of Lionsgate) with a disclaimer stating that it is merely “a work of comedic fantasy.” Hail Mary - Jean-Luc Godard’s modern retelling of the Nativity was criticized by none other than Pope John Paul II, himself. He was quoted as saying that it “deeply wounds the religious sentiments of believers.” But even better was the response from another man who took offense to the film and decided to throw a shaving cream pie in Godard’s face at the 1985 Cannes Film Festival. Also this is probably one of the rare circumstances in which the filmmaker is the one trying to prevent Italian distribution and is actually unable to do so. The Last Temptation of Christ - Like Dogma, Martin Scorsese’s film came with a disclaimer that noted it is not based on the gospels and is a work of fiction. But like the case against The Da Vinci Code, the idea or depiction of Jesus and Mary Magdalene getting it on is never forgivable. Life of Brian - I can’t believe that anyone actually took offense to the joke about the three wise men initially approaching the wrong stable, but apparently that was one of the many blasphemous scenes in this Monty Python satire of the life of Jesus. Also: how could anyone be upset about the crucifix scene? Eric Idle’s song is just too catchy to mind its offensiveness. The Message (aka Mohammad, Messenger of God) - Much of the protests against this epic movie, about the founding of Islam, came mostly because of pre-release assumptions. For instance, some groups thought Anthony Quinn was starring as Mohammad (or Muhammad), a problem both because the prophet is not permitted to be represented in human form in any medium and because Quinn is Mexican-American, not Arab (as noted yesterday, all it takes is facial hair to change that). Other preproduction rumors were that Peter O’Toole and Charlton Heston were up for the part of Mohammad. Of course, the prophet is never seen, and Quinn merely portrays his uncle, Hamza. Unfortunate, nobody told certain extremists, even when the film came out, and apparently many cinemas received phone calls with death threats. Also, a tragic hostage situation in Washington D.C. began the day The Message opened, leading to the death of a police officer and the non-fatal shooting of future-mayor Marion Barry. One of the demands of the hostage-takers was for The Message not be released. The Passion of the Christ - A rare modern film about Jesus that didn’t seem to offend any Christians. Actually, of course it offended some groups, but their protests were clearly overshadowed by the protests from Jewish groups, who took offense to the movie’s apparent placing of blame for Jesus’ death on the Jews. Considering Mel Gibson’s later controversy involving his drunken, anti-semitic outbursts, the offense definitely seems to have more merit than initially recognized. Priest - Five years before Miramax/Disney was forced to disown Dogma because of Catholic protestors, the Weinsteins distributed this “blatantly anti-Catholic” film about a homosexual priest. Of course, it was mainly criticized by people who hadn’t seen it, such as New York Cardinal John J. O’Connor, who likened the film to graffiti found on bathroom walls. Rosemary’s Baby - There’s now a whole slew (I guess a whole subgenre) of horror films dealing with the occult, Satanism and the Antichrist, but this was the hit that pretty much started it all. And because of the parallels between Rosemary and the Virgin Mary, it’s possibly the most offensive to Catholics. Even the media used it against its director, Roman Polanski, when his wife, Sharon Tate, was murdered a year after its release; prior to revelation that Tate and the rest were killed by the Manson “family,” reporters speculated that it was the result of the Polanskis’ alleged satanism and some even claimed the tragedy was deserved. September Dawn - Until last year, Jon Voight’ most offensive movie was probably Karate Dog, but in 2007 he starred in this alleged anti-Mormon propaganda (called such before the Church of Latter-Day Saints viewed it, of course), which portrays an historical incident in which a Mormon militia massacred a wagon train of emigrants. The greatest offense is apparently the claim that Mormon leader Brigham Young (played by Terrence Stamp) was directly involved. Another criticism was that Hollywood made the film to somehow affect Mitt Romney’s campaign for President. Submission - Theo van Gogh’s ten-minute film criticizes the treatment of women in Islam and was apparently offensive enough that it led to the filmmaker’s assassination at the hands of a Dutch Muslim ma The Triumph of the Will - While Leni Reifenstahl’s propaganda film is well-regarded and highly respected today by film critics, scholars and historians, many Jewish groups see its celebration as being “morally insensitive.” Viridiana - Luis Bunuel made plenty of movies that mocked the Church, but this 1961 Palme D’or-winner was perhaps the most publicly protested by the Vatican and Spanish dictator Francisco Franco, who had it banned in Spain until after his death. Bunuel’s excellent plea of ignorance: “I didn’t deliberately set out to be blasphemous, but then Pope John XXIII is a better judge of such things than I am.” Originally posted on:SpoutBlog
]]>Thu, 19 Jun 2008 19:00:57 GMTSpoutBlogSpoutBlog on spout.com6/19/2008 3:00:57 PMThis week we have two big-time offenders: Mike Myers’ The Love Guru, which has brought concern from Hindus, because the comedy seems to be making fun of the Hindu religion; and Ron Howard’s Angels & Demons, the “sequel” to The Da Vinci Code, adapted from Dan Brown’s bestseller. Earlier this week, the Vatican banned the latter production from all Catholic churches in Rome. The following statement from Father Marco Fibbi, spokesman for the diocese of Rome, was a favorite quote from the story: “Usually we read the script but in this case it wasn’t necessary. Just the name Dan Brown was enough.” Of course, these days, religious organizations taking offense to a movie seems so commonplace that news like this is hardly even considered bad buzz. Neither The Love Guru nor Angels & Demons will be too aversely affected by the protests or boycotts. Both films will merely be added to the following list of major offenders (in alphabetical order so as not to offend anyone who thinks one is more offensive than another), as almost a genre cataloging than an inventory of condemned. Brokeback Mountain - Because of its promotion of “the homosexual lifestyle,” many right-wing Christian groups protested Ang Lee’s film. Most famously, it was pulled last-minute from a multiplex owned by Mormon businessman and Utah Jazz owner Larry H. Miller, though his motivation was not necessarily claimed to be religion-based. Despite there being hundreds of gay films throughout the years, because of its popularity, this one was the worst offender. The Da Vinci Code - I already mentioned this above and in a recent post on movies that overcame bad buzz, so I’ll make it short: banned, boycotted and protested throughout the world due to its blasphemous (and fictional) allegations that Jesus and Mary Magdalene had a child together. The Devils - Many of the following films were banned in Italy, but with Ken Russell’s blasphemous adaptation of Aldous Huxley’s “The Devils of Loudon,” there was also threat that stars Oliver Reed and Vanessa Redgrave would be arrested if they entered the country. The most offensive scene, labeled “the rape of Christ,” depicted a mock exorcism involving fully nude nuns masturbating with a large crucifix. The scene was removed prior to the film’s release, but there were plenty of other controversial sequences that led to protest. A very low-quality DVD of the film was released a few years ago with the “rape of Christ” scene put back in. Dogma - I understand how comedy can be seen as offensive, especially in the case of stereotypical caricatures like the one in The Love Guru. But Kevin Smith’s religious satire is so silly and all over the place that I can’t imagine that viewers would take its contents seriously. Yet enough protests required the film to be disowned by Miramax/Disney and then eventually be released (courtesy of Lionsgate) with a disclaimer stating that it is merely “a work of comedic fantasy.” Hail Mary - Jean-Luc Godard’s modern retelling of the Nativity was criticized by none other than Pope John Paul II, himself. He was quoted as saying that it “deeply wounds the religious sentiments of believers.” But even better was the response from another man who took offense to the film and decided to throw a shaving cream pie in Godard’s face at the 1985 Cannes Film Festival. Also this is probably one of the rare circumstances in which the filmmaker is the one trying to prevent Italian distribution and is actually unable to do so. The Last Temptation of Christ - Like Dogma, Martin Scorsese’s film came with a disclaimer that noted it is not based on the gospels and is a work of fiction. But like the case against The Da Vinci Code, the idea or depiction of Jesus and Mary Magdalene getting it on is never forgivable. Life of Brian - I can’t believe that anyone actually took offense to the joke about the three wise men initially approaching the wrong stable, but apparently that was one of the many blasphemous scenes in this Monty Python satire of the life of Jesus. Also: how could anyone be upset about the crucifix scene? Eric Idle’s song is just too catchy to mind its offensiveness. The Message (aka Mohammad, Messenger of God) - Much of the protests against this epic movie, about the founding of Islam, came mostly because of pre-release assumptions. For instance, some groups thought Anthony Quinn was starring as Mohammad (or Muhammad), a problem both because the prophet is not permitted to be represented in human form in any medium and because Quinn is Mexican-American, not Arab (as noted yesterday, all it takes is facial hair to change that). Other preproduction rumors were that Peter O’Toole and Charlton Heston were up for the part of Mohammad. Of course, the prophet is never seen, and Quinn merely portrays his uncle, Hamza. Unfortunate, nobody told certain extremists, even when the film came out, and apparently many cinemas received phone calls with death threats. Also, a tragic hostage situation in Washington D.C. began the day The Message opened, leading to the death of a police officer and the non-fatal shooting of future-mayor Marion Barry. One of the demands of the hostage-takers was for The Message not be released. The Passion of the Christ - A rare modern film about Jesus that didn’t seem to offend any Christians. Actually, of course it offended some groups, but their protests were clearly overshadowed by the protests from Jewish groups, who took offense to the movie’s apparent placing of blame for Jesus’ death on the Jews. Considering Mel Gibson’s later controversy involving his drunken, anti-semitic outbursts, the offense definitely seems to have more merit than initially recognized. Priest - Five years before Miramax/Disney was forced to disown Dogma because of Catholic protestors, the Weinsteins distributed this “blatantly anti-Catholic” film about a homosexual priest. Of course, it was mainly criticized by people who hadn’t seen it, such as New York Cardinal John J. O’Connor, who likened the film to graffiti found on bathroom walls. Rosemary’s Baby - There’s now a whole slew (I guess a whole subgenre) of horror films dealing with the occult, Satanism and the Antichrist, but this was the hit that pretty much started it all. And because of the parallels between Rosemary and the Virgin Mary, it’s possibly the most offensive to Catholics. Even the media used it against its director, Roman Polanski, when his wife, Sharon Tate, was murdered a year after its release; prior to revelation that Tate and the rest were killed by the Manson “family,” reporters speculated that it was the result of the Polanskis’ alleged satanism and some even claimed the tragedy was deserved. September Dawn - Until last year, Jon Voight’ most offensive movie was probably Karate Dog, but in 2007 he starred in this alleged anti-Mormon propaganda (called such before the Church of Latter-Day Saints viewed it, of course), which portrays an historical incident in which a Mormon militia massacred a wagon train of emigrants. The greatest offense is apparently the claim that Mormon leader Brigham Young (played by Terrence Stamp) was directly involved. Another criticism was that Hollywood made the film to somehow affect Mitt Romney’s campaign for President. Submission - Theo van Gogh’s ten-minute film criticizes the treatment of women in Islam and was apparently offensive enough that it led to the filmmaker’s assassination at the hands of a Dutch Muslim ma The Triumph of the Will - While Leni Reifenstahl’s propaganda film is well-regarded and highly respected today by film critics, scholars and historians, many Jewish groups see its celebration as being “morally insensitive.” Viridiana - Luis Bunuel made plenty of movies that mocked the Church, but this 1961 Palme D’or-winner was perhaps the most publicly protested by the Vatican and Spanish dictator Francisco Franco, who had it banned in Spain until after his death. Bunuel’s excellent plea of ignorance: “I didn’t deliberately set out to be blasphemous, but then Pope John XXIII is a better judge of such things than I am.” Originally posted on:SpoutBlog http://www.spout.com/blogs/eagle795/archive/2007/8/28/19060.aspx Post By: eagle795
Post To: eagle795 Blog
Post Date: 8/28/2007 11:22:13 PM
Body: As a work-in-progress Christian I have some guilt about ranking this movie so low. But this list is about entertainment and not the fate of my eternal soul. This movie is hard to watch. It stays with you a long long time. It’s an important film with just about the most powerful message imaginable, and definitely not light fun.
]]>Wed, 29 Aug 2007 03:22:13 GMTeagle795eagle795 Blog8/28/2007 11:22:13 PMAs a work-in-progress Christian I have some guilt about ranking this movie so low. But this list is about entertainment and not the fate of my eternal soul. This movie is hard to watch. It stays with you a long long time. It&rsquo;s an important film with just about the most powerful message imaginable, and definitely not light fun. http://www.spout.com/blogs/mythman/archive/2007/6/6/10233.aspx Post By: mythman
Post To: Watch Everything and Still See ONLY What Is Good
Post Date: 6/6/2007 12:51:00 AM
Body: Did you not see her? ... maybe that's just me ---had a crush on Uma Thurman since I saw her as Maid Marian in Robin Hood with Patrick Bergin (though just my luck she's probably something like 90 now ...).Well, I know the Jesus-story forwards and backwards, so it's hard to tell whether anything I noticed in it was just my imagination (Uma) or something actually worth noting.One of those things was the 'brotherhood' of the disciples---how any of the disciples could've (and any good ones would have ... 'disciple' meaning 'replacement-in-training') stood in for Jesus. That gives creedence to theories that there was no Jesus ... that 'Jesus' was just a name twelve good friends gave their moralityThat made me think of a new way (for 'grown-ups' at least) to understand the Trinity: instead of The Father, The Son and The Holy Spirit, it's The Blood, The Word and Our Standing Agreement.Saying 'The Blood,' I mean the lifetimes of all the Bible's writers and -editors. If you believe "every word of the Bible was set down by God," I feel the need to remind you that 'God is every mind that read His Word and understands ... something-something.' (See how prophecy is?)By 'The Word,' of course I mean The Bible. But that includes both the Holy Edition and any actions seen and/or -heard-of by any 'mind that has rehd and understood.'And 'Our Standing Agreement' is what we all say 'something-something' means.
]]>Wed, 06 Jun 2007 04:51:00 GMTmythmanWatch Everything and Still See ONLY What Is Good6/6/2007 12:51:00 AMDid you not see her? ... maybe that&#39;s just me ---had a crush on Uma Thurman since I saw her as Maid Marian in Robin Hood with Patrick Bergin (though just my luck she&#39;s probably something like 90 now ...).Well, I know the Jesus-story forwards and backwards, so it&#39;s hard to tell whether anything I noticed in it was just my imagination (Uma) or something actually worth noting.One of those things was the &#39;brotherhood&#39; of the disciples---how any of the disciples could&#39;ve (and any good ones would have ... &#39;disciple&#39; meaning &#39;replacement-in-training&#39;) stood in for Jesus. That gives creedence to theories that there was no Jesus ... that &#39;Jesus&#39; was just a name twelve good friends gave their moralityThat made me think of a new way (for &#39;grown-ups&#39; at least) to understand the Trinity: instead of The Father, The Son and The Holy Spirit, it&#39;s The Blood, The Word and Our Standing Agreement.Saying &#39;The Blood,&#39; I mean the lifetimes of all the Bible&#39;s writers and -editors. If you believe "every word of the Bible was set down by God," I feel the need to remind you that &#39;God is every mind that read His Word and understands ... something-something.&#39; (See how prophecy is?)By &#39;The Word,&#39; of course I mean The Bible. But that includes both the Holy Edition and any actions seen and/or -heard-of by any &#39;mind that has rehd and understood.&#39;And &#39;Our Standing Agreement&#39; is what we all say &#39;something-something&#39; means. http://www.spout.com/blogs/risselada/archive/2007/3/16/6364.aspx Post By: Risselada
Post To: Risselada Blog
Post Date: 3/16/2007 12:26:00 PM
Body: This blog entry is part of my “movie year countdown”. To read more about that check out my first Spout filmblog entry.The Passion of the ChristTo start off with, I will tell you that I do call myself a Christian. I think it's obvious why that might be something you might like to know about someone who is talking about this movie.I remember the hype when this movie came out. It seemed like most Christians considered it obligatory for them to see this film. I honestly don't make much personal effort to see most films that come out in the theater, but that is often even more of the case for movies with as much hype as this one. That isn't to say I specifically avoided this movie. I was always curious, but only so I would have some sort of reference point for any conversation or allusions to the film.Finally I've seen it. I guess I just needed to know for sure that I didn't need to see it. Well, I think I was right.I never quite got the idea of focusing strictly on events of Christ's crucifixion and the hours immediately leading up to it. I know Passion Plays have been around for a long time, since the middle ages I believe. But isn't this also the same era that gave us our modern image of Hell as some subterranean, fiery pit of physical torture? Sure there were flashbacks to other well known moments of Jesus' life throughout the ordeal, but I was already too bored with the rest of it to get anything out of these clips, which seemed almost like television commercial length when compared to how drawn out the main focus of the film was.I suppose I hand guessed, but not fully anticipated how much of a Hollywood technique affair this would be. They talk about this thing as the highest grossing independent film. Well it has the pacing and directing of movies like Con Air and Armageddon. There's no moment of silence, few static shots. I think there are more moments where the film is played back at an altered frame rate than not.And here's something that my friend Nick said when he watched it with me that seems to really describe what is going on here. Everything is external. When something evil is going on, real life physical demons appear or people turn into demons. The brutality is all visualized to the most extreme, comical lengths. The camera angles, the expressions on people's faces. There's hardly a time when the music stops and we get a real scene of some quality film acting. Take a look at Passolini's The Gospel According to St. Matthew, which is probably the best movie about the life of Jesus that I've seen, for an example of the opposite. This is a movie that, despite some also comical low quality effects, tells things fairly straightforward without any embellishment.I'm sure this has also been said several times before: the culmination of the story with the resurrection is certainly made clear, but in this situation I just think it needed more emphasis.The obligatory score: 4/10 stars
]]>Fri, 16 Mar 2007 16:26:00 GMTRisseladaRisselada Blog3/16/2007 12:26:00 PMThis blog entry is part of my &ldquo;movie year countdown&rdquo;. To read more about that check out my first Spout filmblog entry.The Passion of the ChristTo start off with, I will tell you that I do call myself a Christian. I think it&#39;s obvious why that might be something you might like to know about someone who is talking about this movie.I remember the hype when this movie came out. It seemed like most Christians considered it obligatory for them to see this film. I honestly don&#39;t make much personal effort to see most films that come out in the theater, but that is often even more of the case for movies with as much hype as this one. That isn&#39;t to say I specifically avoided this movie. I was always curious, but only so I would have some sort of reference point for any conversation or allusions to the film.Finally I&#39;ve seen it. I guess I just needed to know for sure that I didn&#39;t need to see it. Well, I think I was right.I never quite got the idea of focusing strictly on events of Christ&#39;s crucifixion and the hours immediately leading up to it. I know Passion Plays have been around for a long time, since the middle ages I believe. But isn&#39;t this also the same era that gave us our modern image of Hell as some subterranean, fiery pit of physical torture? Sure there were flashbacks to other well known moments of Jesus&#39; life throughout the ordeal, but I was already too bored with the rest of it to get anything out of these clips, which seemed almost like television commercial length when compared to how drawn out the main focus of the film was.I suppose I hand guessed, but not fully anticipated how much of a Hollywood technique affair this would be. They talk about this thing as the highest grossing independent film. Well it has the pacing and directing of movies like Con Air and Armageddon. There&#39;s no moment of silence, few static shots. I think there are more moments where the film is played back at an altered frame rate than not.And here&#39;s something that my friend Nick said when he watched it with me that seems to really describe what is going on here. Everything is external. When something evil is going on, real life physical demons appear or people turn into demons. The brutality is all visualized to the most extreme, comical lengths. The camera angles, the expressions on people&#39;s faces. There&#39;s hardly a time when the music stops and we get a real scene of some quality film acting. Take a look at Passolini&#39;s The Gospel According to St. Matthew, which is probably the best movie about the life of Jesus that I&#39;ve seen, for an example of the opposite. This is a movie that, despite some also comical low quality effects, tells things fairly straightforward without any embellishment.I&#39;m sure this has also been said several times before: the culmination of the story with the resurrection is certainly made clear, but in this situation I just think it needed more emphasis.The obligatory score: 4/10 stars http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/love/MemberTagFilms.aspxlove
Number of films tagged: 12476

Number of people who tagged: 336

Number of times used: 1474

]]>Sun, 29 Nov 2009 15:38:55 GMT124763361474Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/romance/MemberTagFilms.aspxromance
Number of films tagged: 7159

Number of people who tagged: 169

Number of times used: 1000

]]>Mon, 30 Nov 2009 16:13:04 GMT71591691000Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/awesome/MemberTagFilms.aspxawesome
Number of films tagged: 187

Number of people who tagged: 158

Number of times used: 291

]]>Wed, 25 Nov 2009 22:23:33 GMT187158291Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/murder/MemberTagFilms.aspxmurder
Number of films tagged: 8747

Number of people who tagged: 157

Number of times used: 828

]]>Fri, 20 Nov 2009 18:55:31 GMT8747157828Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/death/MemberTagFilms.aspxdeath
Number of films tagged: 4306

Number of people who tagged: 140

Number of times used: 526

]]>Mon, 16 Nov 2009 17:27:13 GMT4306140526Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/it/MemberTagFilms.aspxit
Number of films tagged: 101

Number of people who tagged: 106

Number of times used: 117

]]>Mon, 06 Jul 2009 12:42:42 GMT101106117Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/moving/MemberTagFilms.aspxmoving
Number of films tagged: 286

Number of people who tagged: 68

Number of times used: 160

]]>Tue, 24 Nov 2009 05:15:30 GMT28668160Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/religion/MemberTagFilms.aspxreligion
Number of films tagged: 1121

Number of people who tagged: 67

Number of times used: 174

]]>Sun, 08 Nov 2009 21:17:53 GMT112167174Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/blood/MemberTagFilms.aspxblood
Number of films tagged: 381

Number of people who tagged: 64

Number of times used: 154

]]>Tue, 01 Dec 2009 22:41:53 GMT38164154Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/betrayal/MemberTagFilms.aspxbetrayal
Number of films tagged: 1035

Number of people who tagged: 62

Number of times used: 154

]]>Mon, 27 Jul 2009 04:28:04 GMT103562154Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/and/MemberTagFilms.aspxand
Number of films tagged: 59

Number of people who tagged: 53

Number of times used: 64

]]>Wed, 25 Feb 2009 18:54:50 GMT595364Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/mother/MemberTagFilms.aspxmother
Number of films tagged: 2522

Number of people who tagged: 53

Number of times used: 152

]]>Wed, 11 Nov 2009 20:51:56 GMT252253152Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/to/MemberTagFilms.aspxto
Number of films tagged: 58

Number of people who tagged: 53

Number of times used: 69

]]>Wed, 25 Feb 2009 18:54:49 GMT585369Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/life/MemberTagFilms.aspxlife
Number of films tagged: 1081

Number of people who tagged: 52

Number of times used: 223

]]>Wed, 14 Oct 2009 19:09:22 GMT108152223Tag http://www.spout.com/members/0/tags/father/MemberTagFilms.aspxfather
Number of films tagged: 3580

Number of people who tagged: 51

Number of times used: 213

]]>Wed, 11 Nov 2009 20:51:56 GMT358051213Tag